You have a game with one player that is clearly winning. And you then express your discontent to one of the other players, that you will do nothing but attack him being that he has not waged war on the winning player.

His response is...I can not see Red (winning player). With the assumption that if you can not see him than you can not attack him (Wage War).

Not being able to see what other players are telling you to attack seems like a good excuse. Of course, nobody is obliged to attack even if they can see, so excuse is perhaps the wrong word.

If none of you can see the player who's winning, demanding that another player makes a strike out to nowhere, with no reliable info on what he or she might encounter seems like a demand that they do what you don't want to.

The game log tells all. A person can gain a good Idea what is going on, Just in the game log itself. Just because a players entire units are concealed...does not mean that you do not know where he is nor does it mean that you can not attack him.I understand that there might be a situation that would prevent another player from knowing where a certain player is placed.

That is not the case. If it where, I would of understood this and Not accused him of making excuses.Playing your own game. Then somebody calls you on it and you simply Say, I can not see red how can I attack him? That is a Lame Excuse...meant to be used (play) against rookies.

It was him not waging War against Red. Turns out that I was able to inform them On how to attack red with out being able to see red.We just dump all our units and attack the Neutral that is in between our terit and red (Trench) Thereby Forcing red to Attack us. In the hopes that one of us might break through (red running short of unit to repel us).

Vets love this excuse. They use it all the time. Humm, maybe they got something. I think I will try and use it.

betiko wrote:if red is totally outdeploying both of you the other player should understand what you are telling is no bullcrap. tell him to read the log.

It still doesn't tell him where to attack in a fog game. Also, discontent should be expressed to all of the other players as secret diplomacy is not allowed, even in fog games.

nonesense. If a player is holding a bonus which often takes a few rounds, you have good chances to understand exactly where he is if you are not too stupid and you follow the log with territory counts and bonus values. and why are you bringing up secret diplomacy, i'm only telling to mention in game chat to ask the other player to read the log.

When one player holds half of the entire board 27 terits and Each of the three other players hold under ten terits a peace...What do you do.

Continue to attack the weaker players?

Simply saying I can not see him. How can I attack somebody I can not see, is a cop out. You might find that excuses like that will provoke others into attacking you if you continue with your stupidity. You are a veteran!

It is a excuse to be used on newbies.

There are many different ways to attack somebody whom you can not get to. Not able to see your enemy is not an issue.You have a player that controls the board (player A). Maybe a good strategy would be (if you can not get to him) to looks at the game log and see what 'players' are attacking the big guy (player A).

So if you see player B going up against player A maybe you want to think twice before you attack player B. Why take player B's bonus away if he is using it to assault player A.

I only explain this to some of you who do not know what to do when you can not see a player that you are trying to War against.

Quote ''You can not attack a player you can not see (fog or otherwise). WRONG! Wage War Against him...that would be enough. Waging war is the same as attacking somebody! Maybe not in real life but in a game like this, It is.

If you do not hinder the player's who are battling the guy you can not see (attack)...that is equivalent to Waging war.

I really do not think I should have to try and convince high ranking players How to attack a player they can not see or get too.

P.S. We finally defeated player A. 7 rounds back and forth...Using our units as cannon fodder. Player A could not keep up.

Fog, trench, game with artillery and air. Every time somebody stuck their head up, it got shot off. Take terit every turn and it turn to neutral every turn.

waltero wrote:The guy who kept making the excuses. Red held a grudge against me. Red (big guy) adamantly opposed me Because he felt that there is 'no way' you can attack somebody you can not see.

Even when I proved my point (you can attack somebody you can not see) upon his defeat...even though none of us could see him.

This is a simple game. Does not take too much thought.

Looks as if too many players do not put much thought into it. It is not always win or lose...But how you die.

yup he owned you. Side note: next time put the game number. Otherwise your comments don't make sense and it all depends on many parameters you were not mentioning (like what was the freaking map, or you said it was trench just in the end ect).But take your lesson out of this. The guy who won has probably manipulated you knowing you would spend all your forces killing red, is it a bad move? nope. maybe if you didn't move he would've gone for it, he definitely knew where the guys was.

if you play that trench stuff, you just have to take it like it comes. those things get out of hand, and quick. by the time you start trying to quarterback some kind of gang up, its probably too late. you joined, you take your medicine.

I posted the game number earlier. The game was still going on so I decided to retract the number.

Red Player (A) was upset with me for Disrupting his game (win). Allowing Player B (blue) to take the game.

I thought it best to inform player B that I was going to Attack him if he did not comply. Even if I had simply attacked B oppose to giving him a chance to join us. I would of had to listen to him cry...why are you attacking me...I can not see red..

All three of my opponents really thought it was impossible to attack somebody that they could not see. Did not register or even come to their mind to think about it for two seconds.

At a certain point the game developed into a learning (teaching) game on how to defeat Red. No matter who won.I have played more than a few games. I find that it is the advanced players that snivel and cry when they get attacked.

This is a war game...Deal with it. Of course Crying works sometimes. Have some pride...winning is not everything.